The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Qualitative Analysis of Verbal Fluency Output: Review and Comparison of Several Scoring Methods
Abstract
We compared three approaches to scoring qualitative aspects of verbal fluency performance in 88 healthy young adults. Phonemic and semantic fluency output was scored for word clustering and switching between clusters. Convergent validity analyses using other tests presumed to tap into strategy use (California Verbal Learning Test, Ruff Figural Fluency Test) support scoring of phonemic and semantic clusters on both fluency tasks. Task-discrepant clustering (e.g., semantic clustering on phonemic fluency) may index intentional strategy use on both fluency tasks, whereas task consistent clustering (e.g., phonemic clustering on phonemic fluency) appears strategic only on semantic fluency. Switching can be decomposed into subtypes that appear to reflect different cognitive processes on phonemic versus semantic fluency. Principal components analyses suggest that earlier scoring methods do not fully capture the "process" aspects of verbal fluency performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.82.6.407 · Cited by 8,141
Troyer, A. K., Moscovitch, M., & Winocur, G. (1997) · Neuropsychology · doi:10.1037/0894-4105.11.1.138 · Cited by 1,241
Analyzing the dynamics of free recall: An integrative review of the empirical literature
Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (1994) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03200763 · Cited by 219
Cited by
Snyder, H. R., Miyake, A., & Hankin, B. L. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00328 · Cited by 946
What do verbal fluency tasks measure? Predictors of verbal fluency performance in older adults
Shao, Z., Janse, E., Visser, K., & Meyer, A. S. (2014) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00772 · Cited by 905
Becoming self-directed: Abstract representations support endogenous flexibility in children
Snyder, H. R., & Munakata, Y. (2010) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.04.007 · Cited by 92
Metadata
- Authors
- Abwender, D. A., Swan, J. G., Bowerman, J. T., & Connolly, S. W.
- Venue
- Assessment
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2001-09
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 323-338
- ISSN
- 1073-1911 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3489
- OpenAlex
- W2136723961
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 2.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Qualitative Analysis of Verbal Fluency Output: Review and Comparison of Several Scoring Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/107319110100800308
- The paper
- Abwender, D. A., Swan, J. G., Bowerman, J. T., & Connolly, S. W. (2001). Qualitative Analysis of Verbal Fluency Output: Review and Comparison of Several Scoring Methods. Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1177/107319110100800308
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.